Nikon Z 400mm f/2.8 TC vs Nikon Z 600mm f/4 TC vs Nikon Z 800mm f/6.3

[Kuau]

So I want to preface I am not a wildlife shooter. I do mostly winter sports. Alpine Racing, Freestyle etc.
I currently have 2 Z9's and primarily use the Z100-400 and the Z 400mm f/2.8 TC which I own both of. There are occasions where I need longer reach so in my case I would use the built in TC on my 400/2.8 getting me to 560mm and some time I would need even longer reach so I would attach my Z TC1.4X converter getting me 760MM... As much as I love the 400/2.8 I find myself mostly using the builtin TC and hardly every shoot the lens at 400mm. So this got me thinking I have had the new Z600 on order from NPS for a while now and was told mine maybe showing up soon. Do I a. purchase the 600 and just sell the 400/2.8 since I hardly ever shoot at 400, Skip the 600 all together and continue to use the 400 with the TC and maybe pickup the 800 when I need the longer reach...
??

 

[NorthernFocus]

So I want to preface I am not a wildlife shooter. I do mostly winter sports. Alpine Racing, Freestyle etc.
I currently have 2 Z9's and primarily use the Z100-400 and the Z 400mm f/2.8 TC which I own both of. There are occasions where I need longer reach so in my case I would use the built in TC on my 400/2.8 getting me to 560mm and some time I would need even longer reach so I would attach my Z TC1.4X converter getting me 760MM... As much as I love the 400/2.8 I find myself mostly using the builtin TC and hardly every shoot the lens at 400mm. So this got me thinking I have had the new Z600 on order from NPS for a while now and was told mine maybe showing up soon. Do I a. purchase the 600 and just sell the 400/2.8 since I hardly ever shoot at 400, Skip the 600 all together and continue to use the 400 with the TC and maybe pickup the 800 when I need the longer reach...
??

Bottom line is you should be shooting the focal length that you need w/out TCs as much as possible. Though the new S lenses with built in TCs are challenging that traditional wisdom. But if you find yourself not using the 400 then it doesn't make much sense to hang on to it. The 600 TC offers more flexibility than the 800 albeit at a cost. I decided to go with the 800 due to cost and because I'm fine with turning clipped wings etc into close ups. That said sometimes it's frustrating. You can always go up in length with a TC but there's no going shorter other than opting for close ups.

 

[Steve]

Dan beat me to it

I always recommend choosing the lens you can use the most without at TC. I actually think this is even more critical with the TC lenses since the entire point of having the TC is so you can instantly switch between two of your most commonly used focal lengths. To me, keeping the TC engaged all the time sort of negates the reason for getting the lens.

 

[Midway]

I shot sports for many years. Not alpine sports; primarily football, Soccer, Basketball, Baseball, and golf. F4 gave me plenty of light even at night in professional stadiums. With two DSLR bodies I would put a 600mm on one body with a monopod for downfield action and switch to a second body with a 200-400 handheld for closer action. It was the perfect combination for me and allowed tight framing of most of the peak action during a contest. I have since upgraded to the 180-400 TC and Z 600 TC which is an even better combination that wouldn’t require engaging the TC on either lens unless wanting a tighter framed image at the opposite end of the field or in your case, the top of the hill. I own an older 400 f2.8 that I very rarely use unless shooting in poor light at night in lower level stadiums or for downcourt basketball action. For me if using just one body and a 400 f2.8 it was usually either too short or too long and rarely just the right focal length. The 2 body 180-400 TC and 600 TC combo allows good coverage of most peak action.

 

[Kuau]

I shot sports for many years. Not alpine sports; primarily football, Soccer, Basketball, Baseball, and golf. F4 gave me plenty of light even at night in professional stadiums. With two DSLR bodies I would put a 600mm on one body with a monopod for downfield action and switch to a second body with a 200-400 handheld for closer action. It was the perfect combination for me and allowed tight framing of most of the peak action during a contest. I have since upgraded to the 180-400 TC and Z 600 TC which is an even better combination that wouldn’t require engaging the TC on either lens unless wanting a tighter framed image at the opposite end of the field or in your case, the top of the hill. I own an older 400 f2.8 that I very rarely use unless shooting in poor light at night in lower level stadiums or for downcourt basketball action. For me if using just one body and a 400 f2.8 it was usually either too short or too long and rarely just the right focal length. The 2 body 180-400 TC and 600 TC combo allows good coverage of most peak action.

I was actually considering this as an option also. The one thing that’s was a concern was the weight. Unfortunately for me I have to cary everything on my back while skiing and also carry crampons. Skiing down an icy downhill course with a lot of weight on my back can be a little dangerous.
In favor of the Z400/2.8 it gives me lots of options 400/560/760 though I really never need 2.8 as these events are held during the day and 99% of the time I shoot at ISO 500 on the Z9 because I need fast shutter speeds

 

[CoyoteCreationsNW]

Since the OP is shooting mostly in brighter conditions using the 100-400 and going with a 600 mm lens may be the best choice, epecially if 400 mm is not often required. I find that the lens choice often depends on the day/trip/subject.
For deer and elk I most often shoot in the 300 to 560 mm range. The 100 - 400 mm on a Z7ii and the 400 TC on a Z9 cover that well. I could have waited for the 600 mm but for me this meant 400 mm at 5.6 compared to 2.8. Two stops makes all the difference at dawn and dusk. Sometimes I will use a 70-200 2.8 if it looks darker than usual.
On days where smaller birds or longer distances are the norm, I'll go out with the TC14 external on the 400 TC to get 560 4.0 or 784 5.6. Is the 800 better than stacked TCs on the 400? Probably, but an external TC14 was a lot cheaper than an 800 mm lens and I would be very unlikely to take two "exotic" telephotos on a trip but the 400 TC and 100-400 can be carried (just not for too far) For me, the lower light performance make the 400 TC a better choice, even though I likely use it at 560 mm more than any other focal length. I would not be satisfied if only able to get 400 mm at f/5.6.

 

[Kuau]

Since the OP is shooting mostly in brighter conditions using the 100-400 and going with a 600 mm lens may be the best choice, epecially if 400 mm is not often required. I find that the lens choice often depends on the day/trip/subject.
For deer and elk I most often shoot in the 300 to 560 mm range. The 100 - 400 mm on a Z7ii and the 400 TC on a Z9 cover that well. I could have waited for the 600 mm but for me this meant 400 mm at 5.6 compared to 2.8. Two stops makes all the difference at dawn and dusk. Sometimes I will use a 70-200 2.8 if it looks darker than usual.
On days where smaller birds or longer distances are the norm, I'll go out with the TC14 external on the 400 TC to get 560 4.0 or 784 5.6. Is the 800 better than stacked TCs on the 400? Probably, but an external TC14 was a lot cheaper than an 800 mm lens and I would be very unlikely to take two "exotic" telephotos on a trip but the 400 TC and 100-400 can be carried (just not for too far) For me, the lower light performance make the 400 TC a better choice, even though I likely use it at 560 mm more than any other focal length. I would not be satisfied if only able to get 400 mm at f/5.6.

James yeah for me I usually have in my backpack one Z9 with the Z24-120/4 attached and on my second Z9 I have my Z400/2.8 TC attached and I have in my pack the Z100-400. Bottom line this is a heavy kit I usually take with me. Add the weight of the Crampons and my water bottle it’s a lot to carry. Maybe one day Nikon will release a Z9 level camera without the builtin grip and that can save some weight

 

[Lance B]

As many have said, it is probably best to get the focal length you will use most without the TC most of the time and then just add the TC when required. In your case, this seems to be a Z 600mm + TC and you have both the 600 and 840mm covered. There is a case for hanging on to the Z 400 f2.8+ TC if you ever want to use the 400 bare for that magnificent f2.8 ability. However, you do have the 400mm focal length covered with the 100-400. Another option is to go the Z 400 f4.5 and get the Z 600 f4 + TC. This covers you from 400mm through to 840mm and I would think a great alternative and one I would seriously think about if f2.8 is not important to you.

It can also come down to how much weight you would like to lug around and also how much weight you want to handhold comfortably for long periods, if you do mainly handheld shooting. The Z 400 f2.8 + TC and an extra 1.4x TC seems to be a little lighter than the Z 600 f4 + TC by about 100gms so its probably not enough of a weight saving to worry about but you do lose the 400mm focal length if you go the 600mm route. Whichever route you take, the 800 f6.3 PF would not seem required as you have it covered with the Z400 + TC's or the Z 600 f4 + TC if you decide to buy that lens.

It was a similar dilemma for me back in 2015 when I purchased my 400 f2.8E FL VR - do I go the 600 f4 or do I go the 400 f2.8 and add TC's as required? I decided to go the 400 f2.8 + TC's route as that gave me 4 lenses in one, 400 f2.8, 560 f4 (+1.4x TC), 680 f5 (+1.7x TC) and 800 f5.6 (+2x TC) and have never regretted it. If I could afford it, I would probably go the Z 400 f2.8+ TC + TC route this time around again as I do love the bare 400 f2.8, but also the Z 400 f2.8 lens is a little lighter than the Z 600 f4. The trouble is, the Z 400 f2.8 + TC is well over AU$20,000 here in Australia, the 400 f2.8E FL VR was "only" AU$12,000 so, I don't think I will get the Z 400 f2.8 or Z 600 f4 at this stage. I have just purchased the Z 800 f6.3 PF and use that in conjuction with the 500 PF.

 

[EricBowles]

So I want to preface I am not a wildlife shooter. I do mostly winter sports. Alpine Racing, Freestyle etc.
I currently have 2 Z9's and primarily use the Z100-400 and the Z 400mm f/2.8 TC which I own both of. There are occasions where I need longer reach so in my case I would use the built in TC on my 400/2.8 getting me to 560mm and some time I would need even longer reach so I would attach my Z TC1.4X converter getting me 760MM... As much as I love the 400/2.8 I find myself mostly using the builtin TC and hardly every shoot the lens at 400mm. So this got me thinking I have had the new Z600 on order from NPS for a while now and was told mine maybe showing up soon. Do I a. purchase the 600 and just sell the 400/2.8 since I hardly ever shoot at 400, Skip the 600 all together and continue to use the 400 with the TC and maybe pickup the 800 when I need the longer reach...
??

I agree with the comments from others, but the nature of the sports you are photographing is different. With the large spaces and high speeds, a longer lens makes some sense. The 800mm PF is light enough to be a useful option and as a native lens, is quite sharp. I think it might be a better choice than double 1.4 teleconverters.

 

[fcotterill]

I don't shoot sports, nor do I have any experience of the snowy terrain! However, as you describe the conditions and events; 1. mobility is a factor, with versatility is required for closer versus more distant human subjects. So, a combination of focal lengths is essential. So the 800 f6.3 PF is the logical lens for the reach.

The 600 TC is certainly there for your closer subjects but it is 3.5kg; so it is worth considering a 500 f5.6E PF is considerably lighter even with the FTZ.

Who knows, the options could be different next year if Nikon do a 600 f5.6S PF, which is not impossible ;-) !

 

[agrumpyoldsod]

So I want to preface I am not a wildlife shooter. I do mostly winter sports. Alpine Racing, Freestyle etc.
I currently have 2 Z9's and primarily use the Z100-400 and the Z 400mm f/2.8 TC which I own both of. There are occasions where I need longer reach so in my case I would use the built in TC on my 400/2.8 getting me to 560mm and some time I would need even longer reach so I would attach my Z TC1.4X converter getting me 760MM... As much as I love the 400/2.8 I find myself mostly using the builtin TC and hardly every shoot the lens at 400mm. So this got me thinking I have had the new Z600 on order from NPS for a while now and was told mine maybe showing up soon. Do I a. purchase the 600 and just sell the 400/2.8 since I hardly ever shoot at 400, Skip the 600 all together and continue to use the 400 with the TC and maybe pickup the 800 when I need the longer reach...
??

I have both the 400/TC and 600/TC and sold the 800 when the 600 arrived. Performance wise I consider both lenses are close to identical - albeit at different base FL.
My suggestion is for you to keep both lenses, if you can, until you have used both for a few months.
Speaking to other winter sports shooters I understand that you often have no / few options where you shoot from AND as a result reach is essential -- but you can easily have too much reach. I do not know how viable it is for you to take both lenses up the slope. Certainly they can be put inside a large backpack - mine fit in the Gura Gear 32L but not with the bodies attached. I can put them loose inside the Shimoda Action - none of the inserts are large enough.
I suggest you analyse the number of shots you "sell" or use with each lens and the focal lengths that work best for you. Then Sell the one you use less. Given the demand for these lenses, it is not like you will lose money on a sale - I did not when I sold the 800. BUT now there are more copies around.

I will be flying to Kenya later this week carrying both on the plane with me together with 2 Z9. I will see what works in the field -- 65% of my shots were taken on safaris in 2016/17 with a 600mm and 1/3rd of these with the TC14. BUT almost all the lion/leopard action shots at sunrise and sunset were taken with a 400/2.8. All the Cheetah chases were with a 600 and to be honest - I like to ensure the subject is at least 25% of the frame and much more for portraits.
I carry a ZTC20, as well as a ZTC14 - for those just in case shots OR when I want that extra reach -- I am looking forward to not having to take of a lens in a dusty environment. Or at least to have to do so less often. I am guessing you could be in a similar situation, but more with the weather/snow rather than dust.

The 800 while nice is far less flexible than the 600/TC - AND obviously darker but lighter. Maybe - taking a 400/2.8 and 800/6.3 is an easier carry and certainly lighter on the wallet. BUT - if you buy the 600/TC there is almost no reason to own the 800 as well --- unless you are also a mountain climber or Warren Miller like shooter.
The QUESTION for you is probably going to come down to how often you "only need" 400mm and f/2.8 (and 560 f/4) --vs-- 600/4+ITC at 840/5.6 -- only you can tell.
My choice is to own both for now and carry a 24-120 and 100-400 as well. I will know more, when I get back, in 1 month.

 

[Kuau]

I have both the 400/TC and 600/TC and sold the 800 when the 600 arrived. Performance wise I consider both lenses are close to identical - albeit at different base FL.
My suggestion is for you to keep both lenses, if you can, until you have used both for a few months.
Speaking to other winter sports shooters I understand that you often have no / few options where you shoot from AND as a result reach is essential -- but you can easily have too much reach. I do not know how viable it is for you to take both lenses up the slope. Certainly they can be put inside a large backpack - mine fit in the Gura Gear 32L but not with the bodies attached. I can put them loose inside the Shimoda Action - none of the inserts are large enough.
I suggest you analyse the number of shots you "sell" or use with each lens and the focal lengths that work best for you. Then Sell the one you use less. Given the demand for these lenses, it is not like you will lose money on a sale - I did not when I sold the 800. BUT now there are more copies around.

I will be flying to Kenya later this week carrying both on the plane with me together with 2 Z9. I will see what works in the field -- 65% of my shots were taken on safaris in 2016/17 with a 600mm and 1/3rd of these with the TC14. BUT almost all the lion/leopard action shots at sunrise and sunset were taken with a 400/2.8. All the Cheetah chases were with a 600 and to be honest - I like to ensure the subject is at least 25% of the frame and much more for portraits.
I carry a ZTC20, as well as a ZTC14 - for those just in case shots OR when I want that extra reach -- I am looking forward to not having to take of a lens in a dusty environment. Or at least to have to do so less often. I am guessing you could be in a similar situation, but more with the weather/snow rather than dust.

The 800 while nice is far less flexible than the 600/TC - AND obviously darker but lighter. Maybe - taking a 400/2.8 and 800/6.3 is an easier carry and certainly lighter on the wallet. BUT - if you buy the 600/TC there is almost no reason to own the 800 as well --- unless you are also a mountain climber or Warren Miller like shooter.
The QUESTION for you is probably going to come down to how often you "only need" 400mm and f/2.8 (and 560 f/4) --vs-- 600/4+ITC at 840/5.6 -- only you can tell.
My choice is to own both for now and carry a 24-120 and 100-400 as well. I will know more, when I get back, in 1 month.

you are correct when shooting World Cup Alpine I can only shoot from specific spots only. In general for Downhill I need something close to an 800 because of safety issues I am further away from the racers.. The lsat down I shot I used my 400TC with the builtin TC and an external 1.4TC... So in theory my 400TC does cover everything maybe I should just stick with it for now... The 600TC is very tempting yet my besides the price of course is how do I carry it around with a Z9 attached preferably. Not sure what backpack can handle this setup

 

[Midway]

you are correct when shooting World Cup Alpine I can only shoot from specific spots only. In general for Downhill I need something close to an 800 because of safety issues I am further away from the racers.. The lsat down I shot I used my 400TC with the builtin TC and an external 1.4TC... So in theory my 400TC does cover everything maybe I should just stick with it for now... The 600TC is very tempting yet my besides the price of course is how do I carry it around with a Z9 attached preferably. Not sure what backpack can handle this setup

I am getting used to my new ThinkTank BackLight 36L. I do some hiking and like to have my hands and arms free unless I see something interesting to shoot and when I do I want quick access so I don't miss the shot. I haven't carried both my Z 9 with Z 600 TC attached and my 180-400 TC with FTZ attached but just tested if they would both fit. I think I could get a second body to fit along with the Z9/600 and 180-400 but it would take some organizing. I usually pick one telephoto lens and use the rest of the space for another smaller lens or two, a TC 1.4 and sometimes a second body. It is nicely balanced and easy to hike with. I wouldn't try black Diamond runs but easy paced skiing should be fine. I wouldn't want to take a hard fall on my back with a body attached to the 600. Your 100-400 and a second body should easily fit.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[agrumpyoldsod]

you are correct when shooting World Cup Alpine I can only shoot from specific spots only. In general for Downhill I need something close to an 800 because of safety issues I am further away from the racers.. The lsat down I shot I used my 400TC with the builtin TC and an external 1.4TC... So in theory my 400TC does cover everything maybe I should just stick with it for now... The 600TC is very tempting yet my besides the price of course is how do I carry it around with a Z9 attached preferably. Not sure what backpack can handle this setup

I have not found a backpack that can accommodate both the 600TC+Z9 and another LARGE lens/body within an available ICU with the camera and lenses attached. I hoped that the Shimoda would work but the largest ICU/core unit they sell is too short to load with the body attached. It is fine in parts.
Perhaps if I cut the end off the ICU then it would certainly fit within the largest ICU (DV) and the roll top section of the backpack.

My carry-on is the Gura Gear Batafly 32L (now replaced with the smaller Kibuko 30L) and this can hold both the 600/4TC, 400/2.8TC AND 2 Z9 bodies - but it is not a great backpack AND I prefer the padding and fit of the shimoda action X-70, with its Roll top. When Camera/lens are assembled - I tend to carry them on straps and/or monopod - but then I am not skiing or climbing. There are lens transports but these seem to be single purpose to me - 1 body+1 lens attached. How essential is carrying with body attached to a lens.

The Bataflae 32L's spec is

Interior Size	13.0 x 20.0 x 7.0" / 33.0 x 50.8 x 17.8 cm
Exterior Size	14.0 x 21.0 x 9.0" / 35.6 x 53.3 x 22.9 cm

The Kibuko 30L's spec is 1.5" shorter - which is an issue:
Interior Dimensions - 11.81 x 20.08 x 5.5" / 30 x 51 x 15 cm
Exterior Dimensions - 12.6 x 20.47 x 6.69" / 32 x 52 x 17 cm
Lightweight: 4.1 lbs / 1.9kg

I am one who had hope that Gura Gear would add a larger 32L+ version and so until they do I will keep my old and battered Bataflae 32L for air travel and other solutions when I need a more comfortable backpack. As indicated the Bataflae 32L has the largest interior of any of the options I considered for multiple lens/body carriage. BUT it is no longer made.

I have attached a copy of the Fit of the new super teles with the Shimoda ICU and backpack/rollers. THe ONLY guaranteed fit is the Shimoda EXTRA LARGE DV Core Unit -- but it is too large to fit in any international airline carry one limit when placed in a suitable bag !

Given the quality/comfort of the backpack - I would look at the Shimoda system OVER the Barfly, but the Kibuko looks a little "better than the Barfle". There are others I have not tried. The DV versions of the ICUs are deep enough.

The 400/2.8+ITC+ZTC14 gives you 784/5.6 -vs- a 600+ICT providing 840/5.6 --- I find that adding an external TC does give a small optical loss of sharpness, whereas using the internal TC seems very close to the bare lens. You might try a XTC20 -- which I find is a much better solution than even the TC20E iii AF-S when one finds a good copy.

I carry both the ZTC14 and ZTC20 for those just in case moments.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[wildpics]

Dan beat me to it

I always recommend choosing the lens you can use the most without at TC. I actually think this is even more critical with the TC lenses since the entire point of having the TC is so you can instantly switch between two of your most commonly used focal lengths. To me, keeping the TC engaged all the time sort of negates the reason for getting the lens.

@Steve, a question for you. If you were visiting Botswana and could only take a single lens, which Nikon lens would you take with the Z9? Thanks.

 

[Steve]

@Steve, a question for you. If you were visiting Botswana and could only take a single lens, which Nikon lens would you take with the Z9? Thanks.

600 TC, no question. I know during that hypothetical trip I'd find myself wishing for my 100-400 frequently, but I use the 600 or 600 TC far more than any other optic in Botswana.

As a side note, we also go to the Okavango Delta with our groups. On one trip, the front of the truck (where I sit) was so cramped I only could take a single lens and I took the 600 with a TC (sony on that trip). Sometimes, when you're close you have to get a little creative with how you manage the shot, but I got plenty of keepers with just the single lens

Here are just a few:

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

In this case, I was too close for anything good with the 600mm, so I doubled down (2X) and went for a really tight shot. You just gotta get creative

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[NorthernFocus]

600 TC, no question. I know during that hypothetical trip I'd find myself wishing for my 100-400 frequently, but I use the 600 or 600 TC far more than any other optic in Botswana.

As a side note, we also go to the Okavango Delta with our groups. On one trip, the front of the truck (where I sit) was so cramped I only could take a single lens and I took the 600 with a TC (sony on that trip). Sometimes, when you're close you have to get a little creative with how you manage the shot, but I got plenty of keepers with just the single lens

Here are just a few:
View attachment 56489

View attachment 56491

View attachment 56490

In this case, I was too close for anything good with the 600mm, so I doubled down (2X) and went for a really tight shot. You just gotta get creative

View attachment 56492

IOW you can never have too much lens

 

[Steve]

IOW you can never have too much lens

LOL, that's about it. Put it this way - most of the time I'd rather have too much lens than too little!

 

[pmenear]

I have not found a backpack that can accommodate both the 600TC+Z9 and another LARGE lens/body within an available ICU with the camera and lenses attached. I hoped that the Shimoda would work but the largest ICU/core unit they sell is too short to load with the body attached. It is fine in parts.
Perhaps if I cut the end off the ICU then it would certainly fit within the largest ICU (DV) and the roll top section of the backpack.

Interior Size	13.0 x 20.0 x 7.0" / 33.0 x 50.8 x 17.8 cm
Exterior Size	14.0 x 21.0 x 9.0" / 35.6 x 53.3 x 22.9 cm

I have not found a backpack that can accommodate both the 600TC+Z9 and another LARGE lens/body within an available ICU with the camera and lenses attached. I hoped that the Shimoda would work but the largest ICU/core unit they sell is too short to load with the body attached. It is fine in parts.
Perhaps if I cut the end off the ICU then it would certainly fit within the largest ICU (DV) and the roll top section of the backpack.

My carry-on is the Gura Gear Batafly 32L (now replaced with the smaller Kibuko 30L) and this can hold both the 600/4TC, 400/2.8TC AND 2 Z9 bodies - but it is not a great backpack AND I prefer the padding and fit of the shimoda action X-70, with its Roll top. When Camera/lens are assembled - I tend to carry them on straps and/or monopod - but then I am not skiing or climbing. There are lens transports but these seem to be single purpose to me - 1 body+1 lens attached. How essential is carrying with body attached to a lens.

The Bataflae 32L's spec is

Interior Size	13.0 x 20.0 x 7.0" / 33.0 x 50.8 x 17.8 cm
Exterior Size	14.0 x 21.0 x 9.0" / 35.6 x 53.3 x 22.9 cm

The Kibuko 30L's spec is 1.5" shorter - which is an issue:
Interior Dimensions - 11.81 x 20.08 x 5.5" / 30 x 51 x 15 cm
Exterior Dimensions - 12.6 x 20.47 x 6.69" / 32 x 52 x 17 cm
Lightweight: 4.1 lbs / 1.9kg

I am one who had hope that Gura Gear would add a larger 32L+ version and so until they do I will keep my old and battered Bataflae 32L for air travel and other solutions when I need a more comfortable backpack. As indicated the Bataflae 32L has the largest interior of any of the options I considered for multiple lens/body carriage. BUT it is no longer made.

I have attached a copy of the Fit of the new super teles with the Shimoda ICU and backpack/rollers. THe ONLY guaranteed fit is the Shimoda EXTRA LARGE DV Core Unit -- but it is too large to fit in any international airline carry one limit when placed in a suitable bag !

Given the quality/comfort of the backpack - I would look at the Shimoda system OVER the Barfly, but the Kibuko looks a little "better than the Barfle". There are others I have not tried. The DV versions of the ICUs are deep enough.

The 400/2.8+ITC+ZTC14 gives you 784/5.6 -vs- a 600+ICT providing 840/5.6 --- I find that adding an external TC does give a small optical loss of sharpness, whereas using the internal TC seems very close to the bare lens. You might try a XTC20 -- which I find is a much better solution than even the TC20E iii AF-S when one finds a good copy.

I carry both the ZTC14 and ZTC20 for those just in case moments.

View attachment 56359

View attachment 56351

If you are looking for a way to carry 2 big lenses I use the f-stop Shinn with Cine ICU to carry both the Nikon 800 f5.6E+Z9 and Sony 600f4+A1 together with TCs fitted. It is by far the most comfortable backpack I have ever used and very versatile with a choice of several different size ICU to match with other gear you want to carry.

 

[NorthernFocus]

LOL, that's about it. Put it this way - most of the time I'd rather have too much lens than too little!

Yes that's a better way to put it. I'll borrow that phrase going forward

 

[wildpics]

600 TC, no question. I know during that hypothetical trip I'd find myself wishing for my 100-400 frequently, but I use the 600 or 600 TC far more than any other optic in Botswana.

As a side note, we also go to the Okavango Delta with our groups. On one trip, the front of the truck (where I sit) was so cramped I only could take a single lens and I took the 600 with a TC (sony on that trip). Sometimes, when you're close you have to get a little creative with how you manage the shot, but I got plenty of keepers with just the single lens

Here are just a few:

In this case, I was too close for anything good with the 600mm, so I doubled down (2X) and went for a really tight shot. You just gotta get creative

Thank you for the detailed reply. You have convinced me! . Now the long wait.

 

[O]

you are correct when shooting World Cup Alpine I can only shoot from specific spots only. In general for Downhill I need something close to an 800 because of safety issues I am further away from the racers.. The lsat down I shot I used my 400TC with the builtin TC and an external 1.4TC... So in theory my 400TC does cover everything maybe I should just stick with it for now... The 600TC is very tempting yet my besides the price of course is how do I carry it around with a Z9 attached preferably. Not sure what backpack can handle this setup

There is never the one thing that does it all LOL, its always a compromise in some way be it weight size length, light...........is the need.
With the cost of these lenses may be rent and try first as wondering is painful LOL..


Only an opinion

 

[O]

Thank you for the detailed reply. You have convinced me! . Now the long wait.

I agree, My choice as well, as i have said often 600mm is my sweet spot, F4 or F2.8 glass is my choice every time.

Only an opinion

 

[agrumpyoldsod]

Yes the 600 is spectacular and perfect for the longer reach. I bought the Z400/2.8TC and the Z800/6.3PF about one year before my Z600/4.0TC arrived. I subsequently sold the 800 -- for me the 800 is a little inflexible for the range of what I tend to shoot.

There are choices and challenges -- between choosing between the 400/560 and 600/840 -- the two most important are a) do you need the extra stop that an f/2.8 provides you AND b) what focal length do you want need to use most often to capture your subject and allow a fair amount of space around them to allow the viewer to see the context in which your subject is placed --- the AWESOME thing about these Nikkor lenses with the built in TC is that if you make that choice on the bare lens (ie with out the TC engaged) then you will know that with a flick of a leaver you can "push in" for the more tightly / closely framed image - the headshot -vs- a portrait. etc....


I agree the 600 may work very well for you - but please do look at the subjects you are shooting, the lighting and the settings you are likely to encounter - in my case I believed I have to take both a 400 and 600 with me to Africa and that is because I try to shoot big cats and they are most active very early and very late in the day (ie at night) or cheetah action which is always at long distance.

If I were only to consider African Big Cat Safaris and were only allowed to pick one of these lenses then it would be the 600TC.

However -- you must pair it with something like the 100-400 to provide sub-600 flexibility. HOWEVER -- when shooting with the 600 one should not always seek to shoot tightly on your subject - they need space to breath. Yes - as Steve's images show exceptionally well being able to go really tight is a big stick and will challenge your skills to get the settings just right to capture great shots. BUT - I did and I have seen many others "over use" the tight crop.

I am currently in the Maasai Mara and have 4 lenses with me the 3 I used yesterday were - Z400/2.8TC, the Z600/4.0TC and 100-400. We had a storm overnight and so it was dark and the lions we were shooting were wet, muddy and dark.

Yesterday - I took over 1000 images with the 400/2.8 - split 2/3rd 400mm and 1/3 560mm AND "only" 250 with the 600 -- we were shooting two prides - one on a kill and the other two of the three males were mating and a leopard -- it was very dark in the early moring.
Given the rain over the last few days the grass has literally exploded from almost none to 6-12" with a large number of stems 2-3' high. My normal dry season approach to stand back and shoot at long distance and from low down was somewhat defeated by the new growth of grass. AND we had to get fairly close to ensure my view was not blocked by another vehicle etc..

Here is "Loki" (who now has a new name since I named him 5 years ago) - wounded and limping back to the pride - shot about 45 mins after sunrise with the 400 at f/2.8 as he walked towards our vehicle.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

AND here is his brother shot tight with the 600 at f/4.5.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

AND Lorgogol feeding in his tree again shot with a 400 - first at 400 and then pushed in with 560.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[McStamp]

I fully agree with the opinion that only you with the knowledge of your own photography can tell which lens is good for you. That said I do know the conflict to chose, unless you have the funds to buy all three lenses. Self is working with 100-400, 400 TC and 800 PF. I'd love to have the 600 TC additionally, and I am hoping for a high quality 200-600 Z. I keep the 800 PF as for smaller animals like birds, squirrels and such the lens is excellent. The weight allows for easily shooting out of hand. I frequently run into problems when shooting at long distances on a warm day: shimmering air causes problems quite often. But you will have that with the 600 TC as well.
I carry the long lenses in a Koenig Photobag, made to order in Germany. You can either go with predefined ICUs, or have the ICU configured according your needs. The rucksack is watertight and very robust. I own two: one for bodies, lenses and stuff, one just for one lens with body attached. See here: https://www.koenig-photobags.de/ (I have no personal interest in this company, but use their products since long).